Rakesh Tiwari - (1.) -Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 24.8.1987 of removal passed by the Regional Manager, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to U.P.S.R.T.C.). The petitioner was working as clerk in Bagwise Section. A charge was levelled against the petitioner that he was not performing his duties with full honesty and devotion resulted in serious irregularities and scam of theft of tickets which were found in other bags in the Bagwise Section. The following reliefs have been sought by the petitioner : (i) to issue a writ of certiorari, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dated 24.8.1987 of the Regional Manager (Annexure-2) and order dated 28.1.1989, passed by the Deputy General Manager (Annexure-3) ; (ii) to issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the opposite parties to reinstate the petitioner with full back wages and other emoluments to which the petitioner is entitled ; (iii) to issue any other suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of writ, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and to which the petitioner be entitled under law. It appears that under the order of this Court dated 24.8.1997, the petitioner filed an appeal which was decided by order dated 28.1.1999. Subsequently, an amendment application was filed by the petitioner challenging the validity and correctness of the appellate order and the prayer in the writ petition. Sri R. K. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the duty of the petitioner was not in the Bagwise Section and he was not in any way involved in the scam theft of tickets. It is stated that the duty of the petitioner was in Bagwise Section and he was working without any responsibility in that Section.
(3.) THE appellate court has given a finding of fact (Annexure-2 to the supplementary-affidavit) that : ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... The appellate court concluded that the charges levelled against the petitioner are fully proved and are of serious in nature. The petitioner found guilty of the charges and the following order of punishment has been passed : ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]...;